Underrated or Overlooked Spotters?

Get the Meopta 15x56 binos and for another $300 or so get the doubler. Now you have binos and a 30x spotter. See the recent review on the site of these binos. You can save some significant dollars over comparable Swaro.



Comparable????????

Are we comparing grapes to watermelons here?
 
To clarify, I thought you meant comparable to Swaro spotter.

Either way the Meopta 15x56 is $1600 + $300 for the doubler = $1900 For that kind of cash you can have a quality spotting scope, any bino with a doubler won't come close to the ability and detail of a quality scope.
 
I think he meant comparable... As in vs the 15x56 Swaro which it theoretically competes, even if it certainly does not have the christ-like following of the Swaro on hunting forums. :D

I don't think he meant its just as good. Although I was impressed with the review posted here.
 
I think he meant comparable... As in vs the 15x56 Swaro which it theoretically competes, even if it certainly does not have the christ-like following of the Swaro on hunting forums. :D

I don't think he meant its just as good. Although I was impressed with the review posted here.

While Swaro certainly deserves it's Alpha status, the other two are top notch also...really a matter of ergonomics and individual eye quirks that settle the rest. I own a bunch of Swaro's & Zeiss both binos & spotters, but can't add Leica to the club due to their terrible eye relief constraints. I will say at least the Alpha's service is top notch, and generally never out date the repair...others just dump your glass in the garbage can, and send you a "new and improved" plastic pair as replacements ;)

I think Swaro generally deserves it's reputation(depending on model), compared to say Vortex in which guys swallowed the hook-line-sinker...Vortex's quality vs bang for the buck is a joke in my opinion. Compare the Zeiss Conquest series technically to most of the Vortex line, and it's obvious the Zeiss is a far better optic for the money/price...but loyal fans abound in all genres.
 
I have had my Swarovski 65 for quite some time, not really finding anything to replace it with the ever increasing price of high end spotters over the years.
I had the pleasure to test out the new Zeiss Conquest Gavia 85 this last season and I liked it so much for the price point, I ended up picking one up. Extremely good quality for a mid range price point. I actually feel it's clearer than my Swarovski 65 so the Gavia 85 will be with me this year in the backcountry. Definitely worth checking out if your looking for exceptional quality at the $1999.00 retail price tag. It's the only one I have tried so far that beats my Swarovski 65 at that $2000.00 price tag.

1b0e9e5fb3477172e31afa4d5cd987c8.jpg



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
This is the review I am referring to.

Review: Meopta Meostar 15X56 HD Binocular

You can also look at other posts I have made that have links or notes to awards won by the Meopta (which pre-date the above review). I certainly don't expect you to respect my opinion, but I need not have "Swaro is unquestionably the best" crammed down my throat either. Swaros are good. Many people, including me, feel Meopta can hang with them. If you have the coin and want to dump it on Swaros, be my guest. As I have said before, I don't get to use my Meoptas enough to even justify what I paid for them, so I'm sure not going to buy Swaros. And, yes, I have looked through them. I don't see the need to pay a super premium for them to get what is, arguably, a level of performance only an expert will detect with some charts for comparison. And with that being said, note the picture in the above review showing the Meopta beating the Swaro in regards CA!

Slap the Meopta doubler on a set of the 15x binos and you have a 30x spotter with a 56 mm objective. If I remember correctly, Mr. Denning suggested in his latest book 30x is probably about all you really need (and he is not the only person I have read make this recommendation). I personally don't like using a spotter--I have a decent one and I don't use it now. I much prefer 15x binos. The doubler is only for instances when I have spotted something and really need a closer look. I had no trouble with the Meoptas judging muleys at 2+ miles this year without the doubler. Why the hell lug a dedicated spotter if I don't need it?

I'm suggesting this for people who are 1 open minded or 2 need to economize to some degree in their equipment. If you are neither and you gots them deep pockets, by all means get you some Swaro.

Finally, shiop around for God's sake. I got my Meoptas for around $1,300.00 from a German supplier. With doubler I was in for about $1,6500.00 not $1,900.00.
 
Last edited:
This is the review I am referring to.

Review: Meopta Meostar 15X56 HD Binocular

You can also look at other posts I have made that have links or notes to awards won by the Meopta (which pre-date the above review). I certainly don't expect you to respect my opinion, but I need not have "Swaro is unquestionably the best" crammed down my throat either. Swaros are good. Many people, including me, feel Meopta can hang with them. If you have the coin and want to dump it on Swaros, be my guest. As I have said before, I don't get to use my Meoptas enough to even justify what I paid for them, so I'm sure not going to buy Swaors. And, yes, I have looked through them. I don't see the need to pay a super premium for them to get what is, arguably, a level of performance only an expert will detect with some charts for comparison. And with that being said, note the picture in the above review showing the Meopta beating the Swaro in regards CA!

Slap the Meopta doubler on a set of the 15x binos and you have a 30x spotter with a 56 mm objective. If I remember correctly, Mr. Denning suggested in his latest book 30x is probably about all you really need (and he is not the only person I have read make this recommendation). I personally don't like using a spotter--I have a decent one and I don't use it now. I much prefer 15x binos. The doubler is only for instances when I have spotted something and really need a closer look. I had no trouble with the Meoptas judging muleys at 2+ miles this year without the doubler. Why the hell lug a dedicated spotter if I don't need it?

I'm suggesting this for people who are 1 open minded or 2 need to economize to some degree in their equipment. If you are neither and you gots them deep pockets, by all means get you some Swaro.
Well, that escalated quickly.
 
Sweet Jesus, can there be no rationale debate anymore? Buy whatever makes you feel pretty. Do we need a cry circle here?
 
Sweet Jesus, can their be no rationale debate anymore? Buy whatever makes you feel pretty. Do we need a cry circle here?
Dude the internet is not serious business, I was joking. Your post comes off quite... stern, lol.


If you want my conjecture for debate, I was researching Meopta 15x56s and the reviews and discussion on birding forums was not as glowing as the review here. Also, the review on allbinos (albeit on a 8x56 as they dont review 15's) was not especially kind to the Meoptas if I remember correctly.
 
Have you ever read some posts by the Swaro/Zeiss faithful? You'd think you were using Coke bottles bound with bailing wire if you don't have those brands. Might as well be willing to defend your position when called in to question on this--otherwise people new to this site or who do need to have some sort of budget line will think they are a loser if they don't have the "it" glass.

Again, take a look at my other posts on this subject and look at links there. The bird people are good sounding boards, but they are not the holy grail of the glass world. They met the Brunton Epoch with faint praise. You ever look through one? It was awesome. It was intended to compete with top of line Swaro and it did. But, price was the same, so it had 0 chance of success.

And, I do consider spending the kind of money we are talking about here as serious business. My funds are limited.
 
Last edited:
Lots of spotters out there and on a budget, there is a reason I posted the Gavia 85. Personal preference but one not to be overlooked ;)
 
And I totally respect your opinion on the Gavia. You have them and YOU like them. That is the $64,000.00 question with most of this stuff--how does it work for you? Others may not care for a Meopta 15x56, but they work great for me and alleviate need for a separate spotter. It is an alternative viewpoint which I included as the "overlooked" part of this thread. I freely admit I DON"T like spotters. I think you will find other threads here which show others don't like them. But, the vast majority still go with spotters, which is fine. If you are just starting out, it's good to know what options there are before you lay out that hard earned dinero.

Heck in that general price range I'll even throw in a plug for the Meopta S2, IF you want a spotter. They are nice, no, I don't have one, and I don't intend to buy one. But it is good glass, and (shocker) it has been compared favorably with Swaro spotters costing WAY more.

Contrary to popular belief, Swaro and Zeiss Do Not employ elves as slave labor and there is no jar of magic pixie dust for use by said non-existent elves.
 
Last edited:
Have you ever read some posts by the Swaro/Zeiss faithful? You'd think you were using Coke bottles bound with bailing wire if you don't have those brands. Might as well be willing to defend your position when called in to question on this--otherwise people new to this site or who do need to have some sort of budget line will think they are a loser if they don't have the "it" glass.

Again, take a look at my other posts on this subject and look at links there. The bird people are good sounding boards, but they are not the holy grail of the glass world. They met the Brunton Epoch with faint praise. You ever look through one? It was awesome. It was intended to compete with top of line Swaro and it did. But, price was the same, so it had 0 chance of success.


Haha, I understand. I am on your side bud, I defended your post earlier when I said this:

I think he meant comparable... As in vs the 15x56 Swaro which it theoretically competes, even if it certainly does not have the christ-like following of the Swaro on hunting forums. :D

I'm with you, I am looking for quality stuff that doesnt cost as much as Swaro... right now its not worth it to me, regardless of whether I can afford it or not.

I also have a photography background, which lends itself to glass selection, and there are certain Zeiss MF lenses out there that have a really insane following... but IMO you can usually get something for half the price that is 98% as good. Which is always fine by me, I am not making my living hunting or taking photographs.
 
Big difference in glass when your behind it all day long looking for a bedded animal from afar.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I agree R_burg. Fifteen years ago, maybe even ten years ago, the difference between top end S/Z and the also rans was usually pretty significant. I have a pair of foldable Zeiss bought in the early 80s that, until they got the molditis a year or so ago, were just as good as the day they were born. Now, the technology is in anyone's reach who wants to run a high level QC operation. But it's a rough market at the top (see Brunton's strong as hell entrance in the market and equally swift retreat). Yes, Swaro and Zeiss, at the top end, make some of the most awesome glass out there. But, as you (and I) say, can you find something that gives you 98% for A LOT less? Absolutely! And, that is what anyone looking to drop that next pile of cash should take away from this. For me, the Meopta is a deal for what it accomplishes FOR ME. If you need to pay way more to accomplish what you want and can afford to do that, you don't even need to read this debate, do you?

And, I have not had an issue with using the Meoptas for hours on end. Even with my horrible eye sight, I can use them with or without glasses or contacts. I have not had a fatigue issue at all. If I did, I wouldn't like them. What does give me fatigue is using most any traditional spotter I have ever tried and it usually doesn't take long. Another reason I chose to go the bino route.
 
Last edited:
The reality is this:
1)The OP never asked for bino options, he requested info on mid/lower-tier Spotters...who say's he doesn't have 5 pair of binos that he's very happy with ?
2)Whether $1600 or $1900 for the Meopta set-up, I can buy a lot of Alpha glass for that coin. The used market is soft, and research into used models with a lifetime guarantee is priceless...send the Alpha's in for a full service job, new glass and details will be returned.
3)SOME of us use our optics for more than viewing, as ontarget7's exquisite picture of Daffy Duck proves. The sport of hunting is about the journey, and that includes scouting, glassing, digiscoping for some of us. The new advances in the digiscoping world allow all of us to enjoy nature, and take pictures home from long distance to show our hunting partners. That task can be done minimally with a hi-power bino, but the advantages of a quality tripod/fluidhead are lost....both of which are critical to long distance quality photos.

We all choose our budget, we all choose what our eyes like...but technical spec reviews don't lie, and the Alpha's stand king for a reason. Of course great products can be bought in the mid/lower tiers, it just depends on needs and quality. The budget minded users get their sensibilities in a wad at the Alpha users, yet the Alpha users don't care what you use ?...that wad can cause a rash at some point :D


The optic debates goes on for weeks on end at every bird site, in the end only your eyes and hands dictate the best model for you.

PS: 1 fact is clear(no pun intended), the quality of any optic is solely reliant on the quality of your vision...if your vision isn't good/excellent, the ability to critique it's nuisances is limited at best.
 
Last edited:
In my humble opinion, high powered binos (particularly coupled with a quality doubler) can serve as "overlooked spotters" which was the caption of this thread. I am well aware I could buy someone else's used (cause they gots to get the newest one) binos and send them in for refurb. I'm quite pleased with "used" scopes I have bought directly from Kahles and saved considerable coin on. Getting a decent pair of used 15xs when you need them is a different story. I chose to buy new knowing I did not intend on buying again unless I have to. What is truly ridiculous is saying someone who is paying $1,300.00 (or $1,600.00 MSRP) is "budget minded". That is the insanity of this sport, and what does torque me off for people who are trying to buy an initial set of equipment. I would have loved to have considered the option of binos and a doubler right off the bat.

I didn't now the OP wanted to know about digiscoping. I am not clairvoyant, however. I certainly would concede a spotter is better for that pursuit. I don't digiscope, so its irrelevant to me. And yes, I have a carbon tripod and Outdoorsman's head.

I couldn't care less how someone who spends every day of the season in the field, personally or professionally, spends their money. They likely can justify the minimal gain in performance, and I understand that. I certainly don't care how anyone else with sacks of cash decides to spend it--if it make you happy, by all means do it. God know the economy sure can use the help. For the rest of us nameless rabble, we'll just have to "make do" with "budget optics", whether that be $300.00 or $1,300.00.

Oh God! I just realized the Outdoorsman's is not a fluid head. Thank God I have that crappy Mannfrotto fluid head.
 
Last edited:
.
3)SOME of us use our optics for more than viewing, as ontarget7's exquisite picture of Daffy Duck proves.

I'm flattered big guy, but that is the pic that is underneath the lid in their box. :D

When your in the field behind the glass daily, hours on end, there is without a doubt a difference in quality glass. Eye fatigue plays a huge role at staying behind the glass longer with out feeling fatigued. The more your behind it the greater your chances are at spotting game.
 
Back
Top